Like his boss, Gov. Gavin Newsom, California Attorney General Rob Bonta talks a big game, but can't back up his words with success. Whether it's attempting to defend the supermajority's latest unconstitutional power grab or some regulatory agency's overreach in court, or pursuing politically-motivated lawsuits against President Trump that will have no positive effect for the state's residents, Bonta's out there with his face in front of the cameras and sending gagworthy email updates to the electorate (come to think of it, I have no idea how I even got on that email list; maybe I should sue him for spamming me?). But we don't hear much about his considerable and noteworthy losses, especially on frivolous lawsuits and baseless appeals, and don't have a simple way to trace them.
(Meanwhile, the City of Los Angeles, whose Controller is a proud member of the Democratic Socialists of America, has an easy-to-use Liability Claims Dashboard that can be searched by department and has each individual case listed.)
For example, neither Bonta nor Newsom sent out scathing press releases when they had to tuck tail and dismiss a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's decision to cut off $4 billion in funding to the state's beleaguered high speed rail project. When that happened in July 2025, Newsom threw a fit and vowed to sue, saying:
“Trump’s termination of federal grants for California high-speed rail reeks of politics. It’s yet another political stunt to punish California. In reality, this is just a heartless attack on the Central Valley that will put real jobs and livelihoods on the line. We’re suing to stop Trump from derailing America’s only high-speed rail actively under construction."
Of course, he didn't acknowledge that funding was pulled after the Federal Railroad Administration conducted a three-month review of the project, its administrator alleging that the California High Speed Rail Authority “has conned the taxpayer ... with no viable plan to deliver even that partial segment on time,” or that the FRA had listed out specific concerns to HSRA in a June 4, 2025 letter, asking for a response within 30 days, and that the FRA found that neither response "satisfactorily addressed" its concerns.
As it turns out, all the HSRA needed to do to keep the funding was sign a contract to purchase the trains by December 31, 2024 — during the Biden administration. They missed that deadline. Once the funding was pulled and a lawsuit was underway Bonta's team promised the judge they'd sign a contract by December 1, 2025. And they couldn't even do that. (California Democrats rarely have a problem finding a crony to whom they can hand a fat contract, so it makes one wonder if they wanted this funding to be pulled, or if there was just disagreement over which crony to reward.)
Remember when Trump pulled $4B in California high-speed rail funding and Newsom sued calling it a political attack? Turns out California never did the one thing it promised the feds and a federal judge it'd do in exchange for the money: Buy the trains. https://t.co/XLm7ZI9F5t
— Julie Watts (@juliewattsTV) August 3, 2026
After missing that December 1, 2025 deadline, Bonta's office and the HSRA quietly dropped the lawsuit, in their words, "after deciding this administration was not a reliable partner. The Authority hopes to renew a federal partnership with future administrations."
No video to social media, no press release, nothing. Just wasted taxpayer dollars paying the salaries of the clowns fighting a losing battle.
CBS California's Julie Watts has an extremely detailed and informative series on the whole debacle.
At least in that case the only resource wasted was bureaucrat salaries. This week, the legislature is getting ready to pass this year's claims bill, which his office drafts and nobody ever really questions, which funds the payment of claims, judgments, and settlements for which there wasn't already sufficient appropriations; this year's total is $7.4 million and covers eight lawsuits. Four of those lawsuits are successful challenges to the draconian gun control laws Sacramento loves so much, and the other four essentially have to do with free speech, another constitutional right California Democrats love to attack. Now, we can't fully blame Bonta for these losses; he's playing the hand he's dealt. But at what point does the Attorney General, instead of giving a full-throated defense to what he surely knows are unconstitutional laws, start telling the legislature that they need to repeal it instead? And these are just the claims, settlements, and judgments that aren't covered by existing appropriations; with a lot of effort we might be able to find the rest of the cases for which various state departments used their existing appropriations to pay claims, settlements, and judgments.
In addition, we're not finding out about these liability payouts until the last week of the legislative year. For the 2A cases, people who follow such things already knew about the payouts because the plaintiffs, understandably, made it known. Undoubtedly there are numerous cases each year that fly under the radar.
And then we have the cases where the state continues dubious appeals after losing. The most recent example of this is a case in which the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) was "blocked from pursuing more than $100 million in penalties and restitution against fintech lender Opportunity Financial LLC (OppFi)" under the state's usury laws, alleging that California-chartered OppFi was the true lender and not Utah-chartered FinWise, when Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Gary Roberts granted summary judgment to OppFi. According to legal analysts, DFPI faces an uphill battle on appeal — in state court, where Bonta can usually rely on a favorable reception — since Roberts relied on longstanding legal principles in granting summary judgment. Instead of just admitting defeat, Bonta and DFPI are doubling down, and could very well leave taxpayers on the hook for significant legal fees.
As the legislative session winds down this week in Sacramento, look for even more laws restricting essential freedoms to be passed and signed into law — leading to another spate of legal challenges and judgments for which taxpayers will be on the hook. Don't expect Gavin Newsom or Rob Bonta to admit those defeats on social media (and don't get me going about what they've started with the so-called "Stop Nick Shirley Act").